ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2022
Development of a Minimum Reporting Set of Contextual Factors for Rehabilitation Studies: A Delphi Study.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Context factors in clinical decision-making: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Proposed categories for reporting of service organization in rehabilitation in clinical trials: a discussion paper.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify the most important categories of the International Classification of Service Organization in Rehabilitation (ICSO-R 2.0) for a minimum reporting data set.
methodsA 2-step Delphi survey was used. Rehabilitation experts from all world regions including physicians, nurses, neuropsychologists, physiotherapists, and others, were invited to participate. In the first round, all participants were asked to rate the categories and subcategories of the ICSOR 2.0 with the following criteria: Being relevant for study outcomes; Being distinctive among different rehabilitation settings; Being feasible to use and reported by objective figures or other clear characterization. All categories that were rated relevant, distinctive and feasible by more than 60% of respondents from the first round were included in the second round.
resultsThe most important and relevant factors for the minimum reporting set in rehabilitation services regarding the provider were: human resources, context, technical resources, quality assurance and management, location of provider, and ownership. Regarding the service delivery, the most important and relevant factors were: target group, rehabilitation team, aspect of time and intensity, setting, location of service delivery, modes of referral, facility and reporting and documentation.
conclusionSeveral categories were identified, and reduction in these through discussions and iterative voting at workshops and consensus conferences is needed before finalizing the reporting set.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.